On 16/08/2016 4:22 AM, Richard Chycoski wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I agree that we need to move away from relying on using a block of network addresses to identify valid ham radio hosts.
A prefix trust list would provide much more flexibility for network design. To keep individual hams' radio-vs-non radio hosts distinct, the trusts should be something like a /64 where the actual radio gear will be deployed within a given ham's own IPv6 range. It then makes it practical to 'wall off' the radio gear within the ham's home network to prevent unintended access of the ham radio network by non-ham devices.
Makes sense to me. I also wonder if down the track, we can use the optimally routed IPv6 network to tunnel IPv4 Net44 addresses. I imagine it should be possible to map the IPv4 routers onto IPv6, for those hosts that have IPv6, and get better routing efficiency (utilising native IPv6 routing to take the most direct path to the remote IPv4 tunnel endpoint). Would this improve the performance of tunneled segments of the IPv4 network?
While IPv6 is the future, I believe IPv4 will still be with us for a long time, and no reason we can't try and improve the performance of the IPv4 network, to the point that it can handle latency and jitter sensitive services such as VoIP. It's going to be a major effort to update a lot of our infrastructure, because of the interconnectedness and distribution (I'm thinking of networks like IRLP, Echolink, D-STAR, etc, which are all IPv4 only) involved. If we could move this infrastructure to an IPv4 network running on top of optimal IPv6 routing, that might help things.
Just thinking out loud here and brainstorming ideas.